"When you become conscious of something then you invest it with objectivity and it becomes meaningful. "
WC Is that the same as; I feel that every thing is meaningful or meaningless at the point of validation by each individual or groups of individuals. The same goes for beauty and ugly etc.. mando On Aug 29, 2008, at 5:17 PM, William Conger wrote: > But not even the carpenter can do anything with any hammer. The > hammer in use affects what the carpenter can do with it. The more > interesting question is what does a hammer predict about its use? I > can probably find a hammer that can be used efficiently for only > one or two tasks. The end defines the means in that case. The > object affects the subject. > > Cheerskep's is a one way sort of equation and it is lacking. >> >> Agreed. Think of what you call 'words' as a kind of >> tool, like a hammer. The >> carpenter hammers, not the hammer. > > The carpenter does not hammer without a hammer. Thus the hammer > can define the carpenter. Again, the end can define the means just > as the means defines the ends. There's no way to take away half of > that statement without negating the relation between means and end, > or vice versa. > > That is not a crazy idea. It's not muddled or foggy or whatever > fluffy stuffing Cheerskep wants to mix it with. He is simply > rigidly stuck to his idea and it's not sufficiently demonstrated. > And by the way, his usual retorts with little narrative stories, > analogies, allegories, are not proofs of anything at all. Even > Descartes knew that and it troubled him enough to admit it (but did > not stop him). A metaphor will work but it must be equal to what > it's likened to, as good as another instance of it, an as-if > surrogate. > > Again, when you say a thing, a dead mute object even, has no > meaning you are pretending that you are not conscious of it. When > you become conscious of something then you invest it with > objectivity and it becomes meaningful. I wish we could reach the > state of total meaninglessness (for the sake of expanding creative > awareness) but we can't. The best we can do is to try not to > direct our consciousness in sensing it. Or be dead. > > Art writer and historian James Elkins wrote a book titled "The > Object Stares Back". It's about the "gaze" and how it is symbolized > by artworks and how that gaze entangles us in a negotiation of > meaning. > > WC
